Italians Victims of US Friendly Fire Incident

[CptStern]

The below links have all the information you need.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/070198.php
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/070366.php

you must be joking


"You got to give it to the hairy lipped, commie pasta slurper.

She has the world media eating out of her greasy hand and agreeing with her that the USA is bad.

Dear Lord: Please send this filthy skin bag a horrific case of pooter rot.

Amen."


"Funny to see the Eurocowards respond with their Anti American jabber..........

When the European filth head back up into the trees, the USA will still be going strong.

Cannot stop the fire you degenerate Europimps!
Bush lit the fuse......BOOOM!!! Democracy is spreading and the commie jacknapes cannot stand it!"


"The Italians are about as brave as the French. Both have woman with lots of hair above the lip and a smell that is a cross between 3 day old fish and badger piss.

America Rocks & the rest of the world can sniff our gas"

 

[Bodacious]

you must be joking


"You got to give it to the hairy lipped, commie pasta slurper.

She has the world media eating out of her greasy hand and agreeing with her that the USA is bad.

Dear Lord: Please send this filthy skin bag a horrific case of pooter rot.

Amen."


"Funny to see the Eurocowards respond with their Anti American jabber..........

When the European filth head back up into the trees, the USA will still be going strong.

Cannot stop the fire you degenerate Europimps!
Bush lit the fuse......BOOOM!!! Democracy is spreading and the commie jacknapes cannot stand it!"


"The Italians are about as brave as the French. Both have woman with lots of hair above the lip and a smell that is a cross between 3 day old fish and badger piss.

America Rocks & the rest of the world can sniff our gas"

What are those? Reader comments?

Read the articles. Do a search on the site for Sgrena. If you actully put some effort into it you can see that the idea that she went over there to help the terrorists isn't that far fetched.

Also, most everything said is backed up be cedible links, except the comments and other obvious opinion.

 

[CptStern]

so does the NYtimes post hate comments? what about the bbc? how about reuters? associated press? guardian? it's some rabid conservatives blog ...ya that's on the same level as ...ummm ...ummm the tabloids? ...nah methinks even lower on the "journalistic" integrity scale than the tabloids


oh I didnt know "little green footballs" was a "credible" source

 

[Bodacious]

so does the NYtimes post hate comments? what about the bbc? how about reuters? associated press? guardian? it's some rabid conservatives blog ...ya that's on the same level as ...ummm ...ummm the tabloids? ...nah methinks even lower on the "journalistic" integrity scale than the tabloids


oh I didnt know "little green footballs" was a "credible" source

So should I take your comments as a refusal to put forth some effort to reasearch it or would you like me to break it down barney style for you?

Everything on those blogs has its base in credible news sources, including the BBC.

 

[CptStern]

So should I take your comments as a refusal to put forth some effort to reasearch it or would you like me to break it down barney style for you?

Everything on those blogs has its base in credible news sources, including the BBC.

I asked a simple question:

"now it's a truck?"

you didnt give me an answer, you just pointed out some site that I could have made ..in fact it's no different that what I do here, provide sources give evidence and draw conclusions .......hmmmm I wonder if the fact that they're conservative led you believe every iota of information yet when I do the same (post evidence, and draw conclusions) I'm labeled "un-american". Seems to me that you're willing to accept what sketchy "proof" they provide on the basis that they hold the same ideology you do ..yet I post actual government documents and I'm ignored ..double standard, head-in-sand-syndrome, or excesssive use of blinders... call it what you will, but it's selective reasoning

I really dont care about this case because it all boils down to he said she said ..till there's concrete proof either way I wont make a judgement

 

[seinfeldrules]

ya that's on the same level as ...ummm ...ummm the tabloids?

I'd say something more along the lines of uh, I dunno, Commondreams.org.

 

[mabufo]

Stern, you are biased one way - the rest of us, to the other.

No one is going to get anywhere until some real evidence of something gets shown to the public... and I don't think that will be happening any time soon.. and liek you said: you wont be passing judgement any time till then... so for now I think you need to save your political nothings for a crowd who will listen.

 

[No Limit]

Finally found it:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050308-121240-1847r.htm

There goes your theory that the vehicle is being hidden by the US military.

Now that I have shown you that fact, what is your reason for taking Iraly's word over the US's?

That doesn't show me anything, you have the washington times (known for conservative bias) saying one thing and the AP saying another; for now I will believe the AP as no pictures have come up of the car, truck, spaceship, whatever. Here is an example of false stories printed in the washington times before you try to label me as ignoring the facts:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410290006

http://mediamatters.org/items/200503110002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502120001

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502090002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501190004

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501250002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200412090009

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411190006

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410220005

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410120001

http://mediamatters.org/items/200409240008

And again, can you stop repeating that crap that I am taking Italy's word over the US's. If by Italy you mean the Italian PM then sure, I think his story is credible, but as I said many times I do not believe Sgrena's story 100 times and think in many ways she was dilusional because of what she's been through.

I also love how you are quick to label her a communist that supports terrorism and can claim her kidnapping was false. Where were all these claims before she was released? When Italy sent in troops they were heros, now, because we killed on of their citizens, they are terrorist loving liars. Seriously, reread the crap you are about to post before you hit the submit button.

 

[Bodacious]

That doesn't show me anything, you have the washington times (known for conservative bias) saying one thing and the AP saying another; for now I will believe the AP as no pictures have come up of the car, truck, spaceship, whatever. Here is an example of false stories printed in the washington times before you try to label me as ignoring the facts:

You want to bash me for sourcing washington times and then you source media matters? Hypocrit.

And again, can you stop repeating that crap that I am taking Italy's word over the US's. If by Italy you mean the Italian PM then sure, I think his story is credible, but as I said many times I do not believe Sgrena's story 100 times and think in many ways she was dilusional because of what she's been through.

Second time I have asked this, lets see if it goes unanswered again. Where do you suppose the PM got his story from?

I also love how you are quick to label her a communist that supports terrorism and can claim her kidnapping was false. Where were all these claims before she was released? When Italy sent in troops they were heros, now, because we killed on of their citizens, they are terrorist loving liars. Seriously, reread the crap you are about to post before you hit the submit button.

She is a terrorist sympathizer, you can't argue against that. Quote me saying I support that idea. I didn't. I said there were those that do think that. I didn't say all of italy was terrorist loving liars, either. You can't quote me saying that.

Seriously, reread the crap you are about to post before you hit the submit button. You are the ultimate hypocrit, no limit. No go ahead and post how much better you are than me.

 

[No Limit]

You want to bash me for sourcing washington times and then you source media matters? Hypocrit.

I have to really hold back the idiot remark on this. Media matters showed how each case is a lie, if you want to call me a hypocrite show how they are lying; otherwise shut your damn mouth. In fact show me one example of Media Matters ever lying; I asked you this many times; for some reason you haven't provdied me with one example ever. And before you say I bashed you for sourcing the Wash times you need to reread what I said; I said I will believe the AP over the Wash. Times and showed you why. If you want to believe the Wash Times over the AP that is your choice; however, I provided reasons why I believe who I believe, you haven't.

Second time I have asked this, lets see if it goes unanswered again. Where do you suppose the PM got his story from?

You mean how does he know HIS government informed the US generals at the airport that the car was arriving? Do I really need to explain this?

She is a terrorist sympathizer, you can't argue against that.

Look at Stern's post asking you to argue for it; you haven't done it yet.

You are the ultimate hypocrit, no limit.

If you say so :thumbs:

 

[Razor]

That doesn't show me anything, you have the washington times (known for conservative bias) saying one thing and the AP saying another; for now I will believe the AP as no pictures have come up of the car, truck, spaceship, whatever. Here is an example of false stories printed in the washington times before you try to label me as ignoring the facts:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410290006

http://mediamatters.org/items/200503110002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502120001

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502090002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501190004

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501250002

http://mediamatters.org/items/200412090009

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411190006

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410220005

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410120001

http://mediamatters.org/items/200409240008

And again, can you stop repeating that crap that I am taking Italy's word over the US's. If by Italy you mean the Italian PM then sure, I think his story is credible, but as I said many times I do not believe Sgrena's story 100 times and think in many ways she was dilusional because of what she's been through.

I also love how you are quick to label her a communist that supports terrorism and can claim her kidnapping was false. Where were all these claims before she was released? When Italy sent in troops they were heros, now, because we killed on of their citizens, they are terrorist loving liars. Seriously, reread the crap you are about to post before you hit the submit button.

Whether she wanted to be kidnapped or not is one thing, but she is a communist. Which shouldn't make any difference at all but from the news reports, she is claiming some wild allegations i.e. that the American troops attempted to murder her. In my opinion, i do think it was just some tragic accident that the Italian media of blown up into a frenzy.

 

[No Limit]

I want you to discredit the first thing I posted from Media Matters; if you don't I expect an apology from you.

Shaw, the lone source for the Washington Times article, was discredited by a July 7 Los Angeles Times article, as Cory noted. The Los Angeles Times reported that Shaw "conducted unauthorized investigations of Iraq reconstruction efforts and used the results to push for lucrative contracts for friends and their business clients, according to current and former Pentagon officials and documents. ... In one case, Shaw disguised himself as an employee of Halliburton Co. [oil services conglomerate, of which Vice President Dick Cheney was chief executive officer from 1995-2000] and gained access to a port in southern Iraq after he was denied entry by the U.S. military," the Los Angeles Times reported.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410290006

Tell me why the Wash. Times was correct and why Media Matters wasn't.

 

[Bodacious]

I want you to discredit the first thing I posted from Media Matters; if you don't I expect an apology from you.



http://mediamatters.org/items/200410290006

Tell me why the Wash. Times was correct and why Media Matters wasn't.

I don't give a damn who is right or wrong. You are bashing me for citing a conservative source and then you go an post a left wing news source.

That is hypocritical, I am sorry you fail to see that. I bet if I googled crap long enought I could come up with something they were wrong on.

 

[Bodacious]

You mean how does he know HIS government informed the US generals at the airport that the car was arriving? Do I really need to explain this?

The PM said more than that.

Look at Stern's post asking you to argue for it; you haven't done it yet.

Why don't you look at it? I gave Stern all the resources he needed to discover the information for himself and he flat out refused to even try. Those resouces are there for you as well if you like.

 

[No Limit]

The PM said more than that.

The main thing he said was that HIS government informed the US generals at the airport that the car was going to be coming, I can't think of any reason why he would lie. In fact I'm not even sure that the US disputed this; I need to relook in to this.

Why don't you look at it? I gave Stern all the resources he needed to discover the information for himself and he flat out refused to even try. Those resouces are there for you as well if you like.

If that is your argument fine, in my opinion, and probably most, Stern won that one. Your source was pretty much BS, it is no different than me posting something from Democratic Underground as a source. If that source is good enough for you fine, it isn't good enough for me nor Stern and others.

 

[Bodacious]

The main thing he said was that HIS government informed the US generals at the airport that the car was going to be coming, I can't think of any reason why he would lie. In fact I'm not even sure that the US disputed this; I need to relook in to this.

I am pretty sure he also said the US version of events was false.

If that is your argument fine, in my opinion, and probably most, Stern won that one. Your source was pretty much BS, it is no different than me posting something from Democratic Underground as a source. If that source is good enough for you fine, it isn't good enough for me nor Stern and others.

I repeat, the jawa report had links to credible news sources. All the links were there for you to research the claims the site made and draw your own conclusions.

I don't give a flying **** who wins what. The fact that you do is sad.

 

[No Limit]

I don't give a damn who is right or wrong. You are bashing me for citing a conservative source and then you go an post a left wing news source.

Again, get your facts straight. Go reread what I said. I was not 'bashing' you, I simply stated I choose to believe the AP over the Wash. Times and showed you why. If you see this as bashing I feel bad for you as you will have a tough time in life.

I did bash you for saying she loves terrorists as you deserve to be bashed for that.

You should certainly give a damn about who is right or who is wrong as you called me a hypocrite which I don't appreciate.

That is hypocritical, I am sorry you fail to see that. I bet if I googled crap long enought I could come up with something they were wrong on.

Ok then google and try to find something. If you find something that exposes Media Matters as a bunch of lying character assasins like so many on the right claim I will apologize for using them and never look at that site again. The problem is they show you nothing but facts and there is no way to argue with that. So what do you do? You claim they are a bunch of lying liberals without any backup and ignore the facts they show.

 

[No Limit]

I am pretty sure he also said the US version of events was false.

And he also said Sgrena's version was false. What's your point?

Sounds to me like he is looking at it with an open mind; yeah, what a bastard!!!

 

[kmack]

And he also said Sgrena's version was false. What's your point?

Sounds to me like he is looking at it with an open mind; yeah, what a bastard!!!

excellent point. Gotta look at the whole truth, not just the part that supports your argument :cheers:

 

[GhostFox]

I can't think of any reason why he would lie.

We have already established that if it comes out that he did not inform US forces of the mission, he will probably no longer be the PM. Why do you dismiss that as not enough reason to lie? I sure as hell would lie in his situation.

I did bash you for saying she loves terrorists as you deserve to be bashed for that.

I don't know about love, but it is clear that she is openly sympatheitc to them. You cannot deny that. Just look at the articles she has written since her release. They'd all be up for humanitarian of the year awards if it was based off her articles.

 

[Bodacious]

And he also said Sgrena's version was false. What's your point?

Sounds to me like he is looking at it with an open mind; yeah, what a bastard!!!

Source? I haven't read that.

 

[Bodacious]

Again, get your facts straight. Go reread what I said. I was not 'bashing' you, I simply stated I choose to believe the AP over the Wash. Times and showed you why. If you see this as bashing I feel bad for you as you will have a tough time in life.

So why did you bring up that my link was conservative? What use does that serve?

It they are wrong they are wrong, big deal, there should be no need to bring up their political leanings, so why bring it up?

I did bash you for saying she loves terrorists as you deserve to be bashed for that.

She is sympathetic to them. I have given you plenty of resources that have links to credible news sources for you to discover how she does and you are the one who refuses to put forth any effort into researchign the subject.

You should certainly give a damn about who is right or who is wrong as you called me a hypocrite which I don't appreciate.

You are a hypocrit. You complain about me using conservative sources then post left wing sources.

 

[No Limit]

We have already established that if it comes out that he did not inform US forces of the mission, he will probably no longer be the PM. Why do you dismiss that as not enough reason to lie? I sure as hell would lie in his situation.

Yes, I am aware that you pointed it out. However, your reasoning behind that point is flawed. Italians don't support the war, if they wanted him out he would have been gone a long time ago.

I don't know about love, but it is clear that she is openly sympatheitc to them. You cannot deny that. Just look at the articles she has written since her release. They'd all be up for humanitarian of the year awards if it was based off her articles.

Because she said they treated her nice you come to that conclusion?

She is sympathetic to them. I have given you plenty of resources that have links to credible news sources for you to discover how she does and you are the one who refuses to put forth any effort into researchign the subject.

Again, you haven't provided any evidance.

You are a hypocrit. You complain about me using conservative sources then post left wing sources.

I tried to reason with you, I even tried being nice to you. **** it, you will never grow up.

Source? I haven't read that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16169-2005Mar8.html

 

[No Limit]

I just saw the post article needs registration, here is the first part if you are too lazy to register (like I am):

Italy Calls Shooting an Accident
Official Urges U.S. Probe of Iraq Slaying

By Alan Cooperman and Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 9, 2005; Page A18

ROME, March 8 -- Italy's foreign minister said Tuesday that the killing of an Italian intelligence agent and wounding of an Italian journalist by U.S. troops in Iraq was an accident, but he demanded that the United States conduct a thorough investigation and punish those at fault.

In a somber speech to Parliament, Gianfranco Fini disputed the U.S. military's version of the events that led to Friday night's shooting near Baghdad International Airport. The car carrying journalist Giuliani Sgrena to the airport -- less than an hour after her release by insurgents who had held her hostage -- was coming to a halt when it was riddled by gunfire at a U.S. checkpoint, Fini said. He also said the slain intelligence agent, Nicola Calipari, had made a series of phone calls in an effort to alert Italian and U.S. authorities.

And yes, Bodacious, this is a left leaning newspaper. However, before you are quick to label me a hypocrite again search "Italy accident" and you will find many more sources. Your source that the car is in Italy was the only one I could find.

 

[GhostFox]

Because she said they treated her nice you come to that conclusion?

Have you read any of her articles? She takes great pains to paint the terrorist in this great humanitarian light. I don't know if it is stockholm syndrome or what, but she is very clearly sympathetic towards their actions.

 

[No Limit]

Have you read any of her articles? She takes great pains to paint the terrorist in this great humanitarian light. I don't know if it is stockholm syndrome or what, but she is very clearly sympathetic towards their actions.

Post some quotes, yes, she opposes the war and yes she said they treated her nice. Other than that I haven't heard her say that what the terrorists are doing (kidnapping, bombing, etc) is right.

 

[Bodacious]

I just saw the post article needs registration, here is the first part if you are too lazy to register (like I am):

And yes, Bodacious, this is a left leaning newspaper. However, before you are quick to label me a hypocrite again search "Italy accident" and you will find many more sources. Your source that the car is in Italy was the only one I could find.

Just from your quote above, I see nothing saying that Sgrena's version of events was disputed by the PM as you have claimed above.

I didn't dispute the whole thing was an accident, ever.

However I did see this, though:

In a somber speech to Parliament, Gianfranco Fini disputed the U.S. military's version of the events that led to Friday night's shooting near Baghdad International Airport.

Saying the whole thing was an accident and disputing Sgrena's version of events are two entirely differnt things.

 

[No Limit]

Just from your quote above, I see nothing saying that Sgrena's version of events was disputed by the PM as you have claimed above.

I didn't dispute the whole thing was an accident, ever.

However I did see this, though:

Sgrena said it was a deliberate hit. How you think a hit is an accident is beyond me.

Also from that article:

Fini said there were no grounds to believe the shooting was deliberate, and he dismissed calls by opposition parties for Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's government to withdraw the 2,700 Italian troops serving in the U.S.-led force in Iraq.

 

[Bodacious]

Sgrena said it was a deliberate hit. How you think a hit is an accident is beyond me.

Also from that article:

Fair enough.

 

[No Limit]

Fair enough.

OMG, Bodacious, I'm proud of you. Finally we could find some common ground.

With that said you have to at least take in to account that there is a very good chance he is telling the truth about our generals at the airport being contacted about the transport, correct? So if he is telling the truth we can atleast assume there is some fault on the part of the generals that didn't inform the soldiers at the checkpoint of the transport taking place.

I wish they would release the agent's phone records as this would atleast put this puzzle piece in place.

 

[Bodacious]

OMG, Bodacious, I'm proud of you. Finally we could find some common ground.

With that said you have to at least take in to account that there is a very good chance he is telling the truth about our generals at the airport being contacted about the transport, correct? So if he is telling the truth we can atleast assume there is some fault on the part of the generals that didn't inform the soldiers at the checkpoint of the transport taking place.

I wish they would release the agent's phone records as this would atleast put this puzzle piece in place.

It is a possiblity.

 

[mabufo]

They won't... One of those 400 bullets probably hit his phone! mg:

erm.. In a case like this.. I doubt anything will be released to anyone.

 

[kmack]

haha, i love it, it is all coming into place now.

as more info surfaces I think my ideas will be proven.

 

[No Limit]

They won't... One of those 400 bullets probably hit his phone! mg:

erm.. In a case like this.. I doubt anything will be released to anyone.

The phone records are going to be there and it will probably be the best indication of what happened. I just hope our government doesn't stonewall the investigation.